I agree with Elizabeth Preza, a staff writer for AlterNet, the website that focuses on politics, media, and cultural criticism, when she says, “Donald Trump is a bully without exception.” What’s disturbing about this fact screams from the very lead-in (also called lede) of her excellent June 2, 2016, article, “Trump’s Childish Name-Calling Is a Time-Honored Strategy of Bullying”: “Trump’s insults may seem immature, but there’s a longstanding tradition of elevating bullies to power.” Of course she couldn’t be sure at that point that he would become the Republican candidate for president, nor that his poll numbers would continue to rise as we move into the fall.

But the story she has to tell remains relevant as the debates approach.

“One component of his bullying style is the way he devises nicknames for his political foes. So, in an epic effort to understand the Republican front runner, Stephen Colbert brought on Trump’s Chief Nickname Strategist, Timmy Jenkins, to explain how the Republican nominee constructs these monikers.”

Spoiler alert: “Timmy” is a kid, with all the attending pre-pubescent humor, excellently acted by a child actor.

“‘Timmy, tell me, how do you come up with these nicknames?’ Colbert asked.

“‘Well, I’ve had over five years of playground experience making nerds cry,’ Jenkins explained, ‘and that’s really fun.’”

Preza explains why she brought this sketch up. “The bit highlighted the absurdity of Trump’s juvenile strategy, but as Colbert accurately pointed out, these nicknames have destroyed all of Trump’s opponents.”

“Lyin’ Ted Cruz, Little Marco Rubio and Low-Energy Jeb Bush: all victims of Trump’s expert bullying tactics that are more reminiscent of schoolyards and cafeteria halls than upstanding presidential campaigns. As the Republican frontrunner rolls out nicknames for his latest crop of enemies (Crazy Bernie Sanders, Goofy Elizabeth Warren, Crooked Hillary Clinton), we’re left wondering why his bullying is so effective.”

It certainly is a puzzle! Because it’s so vulgar, infantile, and regressive for a presidential candidate to engage in, it is counterintuitive to think that anyone would choose is as a means to run a campaign. Quite to the contrary, Preza suggests, quoting Naomi Drew, author of No Kidding about Bullying, who told the Daily Beast, “People bully to gain power over others.… Trump’s behavior is the epitome of this.”

Preza then quotes Rosalind Wiseman, author of Queen Bees and Wannabes: “He’s absolutely operating as an intelligent, manipulative bully, who truly does not care about the consequences of his actions.” Wiseman, also spoke to the Daily Beast, said, “He delights in his own ability to manipulate and to show that nobody can stop him.”

Preza reminds us of that moment in the party’s debates when Jeb Bush lectured Trump, “You’re not going to be able to insult your way to the presidency.”

But, as Preza learned and we are seeing before our eyes, “that’s not exactly true. In fact, presidential campaigns have been rife with insults since the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans first battled over executive power. In an anti-Federalist newspaper, a Thomas Jefferson surrogate accused President John Adams of possessing a ‘hideous hermaphroditial character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.’

“Adam’s team, in response, flung the mud right back, calling Jefferson ‘a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.’”

Yes, believe it. And she gives more examples equally wretched going through the centuries.

Still, Preza is right to suggest that “Trump has certainly elevated the indecency to a level not witnessed in decades.”

You have to wonder what kind of toll Trump’s bullying tactics day in and day out have taken on Hillary Clinton—physically and otherwise. With all that additional stress, who wouldn’t be vulnerable to something like pneumonia? While on the Trump side, the opposite might have occurred, gaining energy from his continued harassment of Clinton. His ongoing success with the strategy, his chief if not sole campaign tool, might even have caused his bullying to become an end in and of itself. “There’s nothing like being called president of the United States to cement your status as the top dog,” says Preza.

That got me thinking too. Not only is bullying a regressive and offensive tactic for an intelligent and responsible adult to habitually use in seeking any kind of leadership or power, but this man sees the campaign for president of the United States as a contest where there’s a winner and a loser, and that by winning the election he would be crowned “top dog”! It is hardly the reason to seek the highest office of the land, the person who is supposed to be concerned about the status of all the people.

So it’s up to the rest of us to decide if bullying at this level is really going to be okay. It’s well known that bystanders’ approval, whether tacit or enthusiastic is what ultimately empowers the bully. It’s up to us to make it clear that it is not.

I recently talked to a journalist who said that he didn’t know who to vote for; he normally would vote Republican, but, under the circumstance, because of Trump’s foolish, erratic, and unpredictable behavior, he can’t vote for him, nor could he see himself voting for the Democrat. So, he wondered, “What should I do?”

Well, what must we do when there is a bully gaining power? Do we cheer him on; do we walk away, turning our back on the victims; or do we do stop him? In a presidential election, we have those same three choices, and the third one means voting for Clinton.

Let’s look at the second one. How are we following our integrity if we stand by, simply not voting for either candidate? Maybe enough others will vote for his opponent and the correct result will be achieved by them. But what if doing nothing results in this bully winning the election? The devastating effects of choosing such a loathsome character to become president of the United States are unfathomable. Electing a candidate who appears to have no redeeming qualities would, at the very least, create a monumentally negative perception of a country that could choose such a “leader.” It’s simple: we as a nation can’t allow that to happen. Each voter is responsible for what our nation is.

It is up to us to send a message to this and any bully who wants power rather than leadership anywhere in the world. We must vote for Clinton.